Comments on: 3rd District candidate used youth program to make signs for campaign

By: North Richmond News » TD has update on campaign sign issue - Richmond, Virginia

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 23:27:11 +0000

[...] Times-Dispatch’s Will Jones has an update on the 3rd District campaign issue involving the use of incarcerated youth in a state job-training prog… to produce cards and signs for candidate Jonathan Davis: Those concerns, stemming in part from [...]

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 18:15:23 +0000

This really is a sad situation. I can not beleive that someone who is running for an elected position can not see the conflict here. Makes me wonder.

By: Lucy

Lucy — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:26:53 +0000

It’s laughable that Davis claims he insisted on paying the $1,384 back to the state. If he was so honest he never would have expected the state to cover the labor costs in the first place. Bottom line, he was caught and is now being forced to do the right thing. Is this really the kind of elected official we want?

By: David

David — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:09:45 +0000

an update can be found here:

http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/news/politics.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-10-24-0150.html

By: anonymous

anonymous — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:06:59 +0000

He was guilty. Not enough to lose his job but enough to be in touble.

FOIA…. it is a wonderful thing.

By: Lucy

Lucy — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 18:48:17 +0000

It is correct that Jonathan Davis did not break any agency rules in using the Youth Industries program. However, I have it on the “low-down” that he was investigated by the state fraud and abuse audit department in August 2008 and the results of this investigation were that while he didn’t break any specific agency policy, he did use state resources and time to print his political campaign materials. The first investigation that was completed late this summer did not take into account the failure to pay for the ward’s time and a new investigation has been launched.

I also have learned that the superindent of Mr. Davis’ direct agency, Walter McFarlane at the Dept of Correctional Education did not know he was running for City Council, which is in conflict with what Davis said. Lastly, apparently Mr. Davis will be required to reimburse the state for the “fair market” value of the printing and design services.

I agree that while Mr. Davis’ actions may not have been in violation of any state “rules”, I think what he did shows incredibly poor judgement and was completely inappropriate. I agree with Hilbert’s comments in the RTD, I don’t see how kids who are in jail can voluntarily agree to work for their supervisory. It feels like coersion to me and an exploitation of these kids.
Furthermore, he himself stated to the RTD that he didn’t know how the youth’s $2 per hour wage was paid, which means he didn’t pay it and we as taxpayers did. To me, that is inappropriate for someone seeking elected office.

By: Lauren S.

Lauren S. — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:44:39 +0000

Ah, credit where credit is due… I feel I must post this information, as a Hilbert supporter, in the effort of keeping this election clean.
I got it on the “low-down” that Jonathan did not break any agency’s rules. The organization he works for, a non-profit extension of the Dept. of Correctional Education, is a non-profit business. It is run like a business and contracts like a business. Jonathan purchased, as it does cost less than for-profit companies, their printing services. Now, whether it goes against state code that an extension of government printed items for a campaign (and appears to be a conflict of interest), is outside the scope of any agency’s rules.

By: Hilbert v Davis heats up over Lawrence’s allegations | RVANews

Hilbert v Davis heats up over Lawrence’s allegations | RVANews — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 12:14:47 +0000

[...] 1980s/1990s Richmond politics, the Chris Hilbert v Jonathan Davis campaign in the Third District is running hot right now. In a recent Richmond Voice, owner of much vacant and blighted property Oliver Lawrence complained [...]

By: John

John — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 02:00:12 +0000

I don’t want to get into the habit of trying to defend or over-explain why I do what I do, but I posted the TD piece “quickly” because it was published the day before I do most of my posting on NRN. If it had come out a day later, it would have been a week before I got it up. I didn’t read most of the comments on the post until late this week, so didn’t know about the Voice story until then. Hope that helps clarify things, Lowell.

By: North Richmond News » Property owner complains to Richmond Voice about citations - Richmond, Virginia

Sun, 19 Oct 2008 00:35:09 +0000

[...] and a string of commentary on a recent article in the Richmond Voice; the article was cited in a thread of comments here at North Richmond News earlier this week. From CHPN: Oliver Lawrence, long-time owner of much [...]